Islam

[MaineShark]

You sound exactly like one of the White Supremacist groups, saying that ?the Black man is just inferior to the White man, and is infecting our society with crime.?

I?ve never called you a white supremacist or a racist.  Not that I am surprised that you would try to claim that... it fits with the general level of intelligence of your other posts.

Oh, I'm sorry. Please explain to me what you meant, then, and be sure to use small words, seeing as you imply that I'm stupid, as well.

I didn't imply that you are stupid.  Certainly stupider than most, but "stupid" in and of itself is fairly meaningless, like calling someone "faster" without adding "than xxx."

Anyone with a sixth-grade level of reading comprehension should be able to determine that I didn't call you a white supremacist or a racist, in the quoted passage or anywhere else.

I certainly compared your tactics to the tactics of those groups.

I'm not even going to address anything else in your post until you list a source for your quotes.  Once you do that, we'll examine the authenticity of your source, and address your other nonsense.

Joe

[penguins4me]

Fair enough, but if you care to examine the "Quote from" line, you'll see the Koran (or other holy book) cited, sura and verse (or page, as applicable). If you care to use a different translation, by all means, please specify, and I'll use that one for references.

My goal, however, was to point out that Islam is a violent religion, whether or not all followers of Islam are violent individually. Beyond that, I have no interest in debating.

[stitcherman]

can't you see both sides are being set up here....................



[attachment deleted by admin]

[MaineShark]

Fair enough, but if you care to examine the "Quote from" line, you'll see the Koran (or other holy book) cited, sura and verse (or page, as applicable). If you care to use a different translation, by all means, please specify, and I'll use that one for references.

That's not what I asked.  Which specific translation are you using?

Joe

[penguins4me]

That's not what I asked.  Which specific translation are you using?

Abdullah Yusuf Ali's, Marmaduke Pickthall's, and Mohammad Habib Shakir's. I don't pick and choose, but usually grab references from whichever translation the "searchable Koran" site I currently favor uses (in this case, it's Shakir's). If I use a quote from a site, that site was the one dictating which version was used.

[MaineShark]

That's not what I asked.  Which specific translation are you using?

Abdullah Yusuf Ali's, Marmaduke Pickthall's, and Mohammad Habib Shakir's. I don't pick and choose, but usually grab references from whichever translation the "searchable Koran" site I currently favor uses (in this case, it's Shakir's). If I use a quote from a site, that site was the one dictating which version was used.

That's amusing, given the level of controversy surrounding Shakir's translation (eg, Shakir was adamantly opposed to translation of the Quran, and "his" translation didn't appear until after his death).

But, of course, you knew all about that, right?  Because you're such an expert on Islam.  I know that whenever I wish to quote from a non-English book, I try and find a very controversial translation which carries grave doubts as to its authenticity.  After all, that's the expert way of doing things!

Joe

[KBCraig]

That's amusing, given the level of controversy surrounding Shakir's translation (eg, Shakir was adamantly opposed to translation of the Quran, and "his" translation didn't appear until after his death).

But, of course, you knew all about that, right?  Because you're such an expert on Islam.  I know that whenever I wish to quote from a non-English book, I try and find a very controversial translation which carries grave doubts as to its authenticity.  After all, that's the expert way of doing things!

Joe

The whole argument about translations is amusing, because the "real" Muslims I know insist no translation is valid, and that the Q'uran can only be studied legitimately in Arabic. Some permit translations for casual conversation, but they insist only Arabic is "the word of Allah".

[MaineShark]

The whole argument about translations is amusing, because the "real" Muslims I know insist no translation is valid, and that the Q'uran can only be studied legitimately in Arabic. Some permit translations for casual conversation, but they insist only Arabic is "the word of Allah".

Indeed.  Arabic does not translate properly into English.  Any use of a translation is bound to be frought with errors.

It makes more sense to analyze in situ usage of the Quran.  Who counsels peace and who counsels war?  Relying on some power-mad nutcase's interpretation of the Quran is like trusting Bush when he talks about "freedom" and "liberty."

The Muslims who counsel peace are not in a position of gaining power as a result, whereas the nutcases who counsel "death to the West" are invariably part of a power structure which is built on that message, and have every reason to lie about the scriptural support for their system.

Joe

[penguins4me]

KBCraig gave the proper answer, to include muslims' retort about translations. Joe, the "cannot be translated" argument is, frankly, bullshit. There is no way to justify the absolute warlike rhetoric by claiming that "the Koran cannot be translated" - to say otherwise is to claim up is down and black is white, etc. Arabic is not some ancient, mystical language. It arose out of Aramaic, a few hundred years after Rome destroyed the Jews' temple. It *can* and *has* been translated, and there are many translations to choose from. ALL condemn Islam as a violent, evil religion. Further, the Koran is "not translatable" because it (in the original Arabic) is filled with errors, scientific errors, and conflicting accounts of singular events - it is "not translatable" because it is crap! - and the head honchos know it, hence this provably and fatally flawed argument.

I'm not even going to get into a debate regarding this point, as anyone who brings forth this argument is either ignorant, willfully or not, or outright stupid. Now, if you have a logical point you wish to present in favor of Islam, please do so, using any translation you care to use, and we'll discuss.

Now, you did have one point (though one I'd already addressed) regarding the peace/war factions, and this is covered by both the Koran claiming as moral lying to infidels to advance "Allah's cause", and by abrogation, which we covered a few posts back, along with the fact that the warlike decrees from Allah were given last.

-edit
war/peace topic

The whole argument about translations is amusing [...]

Yes, and it's also ultimately pointless, for reasons you'd stated - I was hoping to skip right past that and start dissecting Koranic passages, etc., but instead the "untranslatable" crap comes out instead. Sigh.

[MaineShark]

KBCraig gave the proper answer, to include muslims' retort about translations. Joe, the "cannot be translated" argument is, frankly, bullshit. There is no way to justify the absolute warlike rhetoric by claiming that "the Koran cannot be translated" - to say otherwise is to claim up is down and black is white, etc. Arabic is not some ancient, mystical language. It arose out of Aramaic, a few hundred years after Rome destroyed the Jews' temple. It *can* and *has* been translated, and there are many translations to choose from. ALL condemn Islam as a violent, evil religion. Further, the Koran is "not translatable" because it (in the original Arabic) is filled with errors, scientific errors, and conflicting accounts of singular events - it is "not translatable" because it is crap! - and the head honchos know it, hence this provably and fatally flawed argument.

I'm not even going to get into a debate regarding this point, as anyone who brings forth this argument is either ignorant, willfully or not, or outright stupid. Now, if you have a logical point you wish to present in favor of Islam, please do so, using any translation you care to use, and we'll discuss.

Now, you did have one point (though one I'd already addressed) regarding the peace/war factions, and this is covered by both the Koran claiming as moral lying to infidels to advance "Allah's cause", and by abrogation, which we covered a few posts back, along with the fact that the warlike decrees from Allah were given last.

-edit
war/peace topic

The whole argument about translations is amusing [...]

Yes, and it's also ultimately pointless, for reasons you'd stated - I was hoping to skip right past that and start dissecting Koranic passages, etc., but instead the "untranslatable" crap comes out instead. Sigh.

This has to be one of the most amusing bits of utter nonsense that I've heard in the last couple weeks.  And if you knew some or the utter numbskulls I deal with on a regular basis at work, you'd know how much that actually means.  I would have replied sooner, but I was too busy laughing at this to actually respond.  You know, between those bouts of being murdered by irate Muslims.

Almost any language has concepts that are unique to it.  And almost any language has "holes" in it.

English is the most diverse of all languages on this planet, but even English has holes: concepts that it simply cannot express.

The more varied the difference between the speakers of two languages, the less they will be able to discuss.  Arabic is very different from English, because it stems from a different background.  Similarly, there are concepts that can be expressed in Hebrew which cannot be expressed in English.  "Shalom" has no direct translation to English.

On the other hand, my mother's grandmother and my fathers mother were able to converse quite well at my parents' wedding, speaking Yiddish and Pennsylvania Dutch (respectively), because those languages/dialects have very similar roots.

But I guess all linguists must be wrong, because some bigot says so, right?

As far as why that's important... well, it's very simple (you might even be able to grasp this concept, although I'm not going to hold my breath on that):

If you translate a word in language that has no direct equivalent in your language, you have to choose something to take its place.  Well, what do you choose, and how does that affect the meaning of the resuling passage?

It's like all the Jews and Christians who claim killing is opposed by the Ten Commandments... just because some fool translates something wrong, and other fools copy his work without bothering to examine it, does not mean that he was correct.

As far as the Koran being "filled with errors, scientific errors, and conflicting accounts of singular events"... how would that be different from any other holy book?

Joe

[penguins4me]

I take it then, due to your ignoring all other points I made regarding Islam's nature, inasmuch as Islam is concerned, we're in agreement that true/fundamental/canonical Islam mandates violence against and the subjugation of all unbelievers, regardless of the fact that some/many/most muslims don't practice true/fundamental/canonical Islam?

Or are you honestly presenting an argument that all translations of the Koran translate black as white, up as down, and peace as violence?

If you translate a word in language that has no direct equivalent in your language, you have to choose something to take its place.  Well, what do you choose, and how does that affect the meaning of the resuling passage?

This is the question which translators and linguists seek to answer during the process of completing their work. The last thing I'll say regarding this is that concepts don't require word-for-word translations.

[money dollars]

I take it then, due to your ignoring all other points I made regarding Islam's nature, inasmuch as Islam is concerned, we're in agreement that true/fundamental/canonical Islam mandates violence against and the subjugation of all unbelievers, regardless of the fact that some/many/most muslims don't practice true/fundamental/canonical Islam?

That seems to be true of all mainstream Abrahamic religions. 

[MaineShark]

I take it then, due to your ignoring all other points I made regarding Islam's nature, inasmuch as Islam is concerned, we're in agreement that true/fundamental/canonical Islam mandates violence against and the subjugation of all unbelievers, regardless of the fact that some/many/most muslims don't practice true/fundamental/canonical Islam?

No.  I simply have no interest in addressing your notions of what Islam is.  If you can come up with a relatively-accurate translation of the Koran that says those things, we can discuss them.

Or are you honestly presenting an argument that all translations of the Koran translate black as white, up as down, and peace as violence?

Precisely how many translations of the Koran have you read?  Don?t make absolute statements.  There are plenty of translations that weren?t written by nutcases who sought to justify their violent goals.

If you translate a word in language that has no direct equivalent in your language, you have to choose something to take its place.  Well, what do you choose, and how does that affect the meaning of the resuling passage?

This is the question which translators and linguists seek to answer during the process of completing their work.

Indeed.  And many are utterly incompetent.  And many others have an axe to grind and they either intentionally or subconsciously let that color their word choice.

The last thing I'll say regarding this is that concepts don't require word-for-word translations.

So, apparently, your contention is that there?s no difference between the actual Hebrew which translates most accurately as ?Thou shalt not Murder? and the KJV ?Thou shalt not Kill??  Killing and murder are the same, in your world?

I don?t think that someone who doesn?t comprehend basic English should really be attempting to argue theology based on translations of Arabic...

Joe

[penguins4me]

Revisiting an older statement:

No religion is peaceful, from where I?m standing. However, Islam is no more violent than any other major religion, which is what I asserted.

I am not comparing Islam to anything but itself. It does not matter to me what someone thinks of Islam relative to any other standard, but only that true Islam mandates violence, world domination, and intolerance of anything contrary to itself.

No.  I simply have no interest in addressing your notions of what Islam is.  If you can come up with a relatively-accurate translation of the Koran that says those things, we can discuss them.

No problem - I'll use any translation out there, as I'm not picky. If you have a specific "relatively-accurate translation" in mind, identify it, and I'll use it for reference. Until then, here are three versions, including Shakir's for easy reference:

Advocating world domination; forbidding friendships with non-muslims

004.088 Why should ye be divided into two parties about the Hypocrites? Allah hath upset them for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way? For those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way, never shalt thou find the Way.
004.089 They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-

004.088 What aileth you that ye are become two parties regarding the hypocrites, when Allah cast them back (to disbelief) because of what they earned? Seek ye to guide him whom Allah hath sent astray? He whom Allah sendeth astray, for him thou (O Muhammad) canst not find a road.
004.089 They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them,

004.088 What is the matter with you, then, that you have become two parties about the hypocrites, while Allah has made them return (to unbelief) for what they have earned? Do you wish to guide him whom Allah has caused to err? And whomsoever Allah causes to err, you shall by no means find a way for him.
004.089 They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.

War against non-muslims until Islam is the only religion

008.038 Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for  them).
008.039 And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah  altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do.

008.038 Tell those who disbelieve that if they cease (from persecution of believers) that which is past will be forgiven them; but if they return (thereto) then the example of the men of old hath already gone (before them, for a warning).
008.039 And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah. But if they cease, then lo! Allah is seer of what they do.

008.038 Say to those who disbelieve, if they desist, that which is past shall be forgiven to them; and if they return, then what happened to the ancients has already passed.
008.039 And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah; but if they desist, then surely Allah sees what they do.

The last word on relations with non-muslims, relative to chronological order

009.123 O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him.

009.123 O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him).

009.123 O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

Lastly, I'm able to turn your own argument regarding translations right back at you with this little inspired tidbit:

Lying is wrong, except in three things: the lie of a man to his wife to make her content with him; a lie to an enemy, for war is deception; or a lie to settle trouble between people

Lying to an enemy is moral under Islam. Who to believe? Let's see what the Koran has to say, anyway:

Koran open to Satanic corruption; explicit acknowledgement of abrogation principle

022.052 Never did We send a messenger or a prophet before thee, but, when he framed a desire, Satan threw some (vanity) into his desire: but Allah will cancel anything (vain) that Satan throws in, and Allah will confirm (and establish) His Signs: for Allah is full of Knowledge and Wisdom:

022.052 Never sent We a messenger or a prophet before thee but when He recited (the message) Satan proposed (opposition) in respect of that which he recited thereof. But Allah abolisheth that which Satan proposeth. Then Allah establisheth His revelations. Allah is Knower, Wise;

022.052 And We did not send before you any messenger or prophet, but when he desired, the Shaitan made a suggestion respecting his desire; but Allah annuls that which the Shaitan casts, then does Allah establish His communications, and Allah is Knowing, Wise,

[MaineShark]

Revisiting an older statement:

No religion is peaceful, from where I?m standing. However, Islam is no more violent than any other major religion, which is what I asserted.

I am not comparing Islam to anything but itself. It does not matter to me what someone thinks of Islam relative to any other standard, but only that true Islam mandates violence, world domination, and intolerance of anything contrary to itself.

In which case, everything you've said is meaningless.  It's like calling interplanetary space "warm," just because it's above absolute zero.

You can't compare something to itself.  And you can't compare something to an arbitrary, unrealistic standard if you want anyone to take you the least bit seriously.

No.  I simply have no interest in addressing your notions of what Islam is.  If you can come up with a relatively-accurate translation of the Koran that says those things, we can discuss them.

No problem - I'll use any translation out there, as I'm not picky. If you have a specific "relatively-accurate translation" in mind, identify it, and I'll use it for reference.

Alright, use Dr. Rashad Khalifa's translation, just for amusement.

Joe